PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
JULZ vs. FLJJ
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

JULZ vs. FLJJ - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, JULZ achieves a 8.79% return, which is significantly higher than FLJJ's 4.98% return.


JULZ

1D
-0.52%
1M
4.36%
YTD
8.79%
6M
8.56%
1Y
22.07%
3Y*
16.86%
5Y*
11.28%
10Y*

FLJJ

1D
-0.00%
1M
1.88%
YTD
4.98%
6M
5.80%
1Y
15.29%
3Y*
5Y*
10Y*
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

JULZ vs. FLJJ - Yearly Performance Comparison


Correlation

The correlation between JULZ and FLJJ is 0.94, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.94

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 2, 2024

0.94

The correlation between JULZ and FLJJ has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.94 - a consistent structural relationship.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

JULZ vs. FLJJ — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

JULZ
JULZ Risk / Return Rank: 6363
Overall Rank
JULZ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6666
Sharpe Ratio Rank
JULZ Sortino Ratio Rank: 6666
Sortino Ratio Rank
JULZ Omega Ratio Rank: 6565
Omega Ratio Rank
JULZ Calmar Ratio Rank: 5353
Calmar Ratio Rank
JULZ Martin Ratio Rank: 6363
Martin Ratio Rank

FLJJ
FLJJ Risk / Return Rank: 8989
Overall Rank
FLJJ Sharpe Ratio Rank: 8989
Sharpe Ratio Rank
FLJJ Sortino Ratio Rank: 9393
Sortino Ratio Rank
FLJJ Omega Ratio Rank: 9393
Omega Ratio Rank
FLJJ Calmar Ratio Rank: 7878
Calmar Ratio Rank
FLJJ Martin Ratio Rank: 9090
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

JULZ vs. FLJJ - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ) and Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.


JULZFLJJDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.86

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-1.65

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.39

1.65

-0.26

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

2.60

3.98

-1.38

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

11.36

20.87

-9.51

JULZ vs. FLJJ - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current JULZ Sharpe Ratio is 2.16, which is comparable to the FLJJ Sharpe Ratio of 3.02. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of JULZ and FLJJ, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Sharpe Ratios by Period


JULZFLJJDifference

Sharpe Ratio (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

2.16

3.02

-0.86

Sharpe Ratio (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.93

Sharpe Ratio (All Time)

Calculated using the full available price history

1.15

2.14

-0.98

Drawdowns

JULZ vs. FLJJ - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum JULZ drawdown since its inception was -14.71%, which is greater than FLJJ's maximum drawdown of -6.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for JULZ and FLJJ.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


JULZFLJJDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-14.71%

-6.91%

-7.80%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-8.53%

-3.86%

-4.67%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-14.71%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-14.71%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-0.52%

-0.05%

-0.47%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-2.98%

-0.78%

-2.20%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

1.95%

0.73%

+1.22%

Volatility

JULZ vs. FLJJ - Volatility Comparison

Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF (JULZ) has a higher volatility of 2.61% compared to Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF (FLJJ) at 0.86%. This indicates that JULZ's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than FLJJ based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


JULZFLJJDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

2.61%

0.86%

+1.75%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

8.05%

3.59%

+4.46%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

10.25%

5.10%

+5.15%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

12.19%

6.21%

+5.98%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

12.32%

6.21%

+6.11%

JULZ vs. FLJJ - Expense Ratio Comparison

JULZ has a 0.79% expense ratio, which is higher than FLJJ's 0.74% expense ratio.


Dividends

JULZ vs. FLJJ - Dividend Comparison

JULZ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 11.00%, while FLJJ has not paid dividends to shareholders.


PositionTTM2025202420232022
FLJJ
Allianzim U.S. Large Cap 6 Month Floor5 Jan/Jul ETF
0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
JULZ
Trueshares Structured Outcome (July) ETF
11.00%11.96%3.30%3.59%0.07%

Frequently Asked Questions


With a correlation of 0.94, JULZ and FLJJ move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

JULZ has higher volatility (2.61%) compared to FLJJ (0.86%). In terms of maximum drawdown, JULZ dropped -14.71% vs FLJJ's -6.91%.

On 1-year performance, JULZ leads with 22.07% vs 15.29% for FLJJ. On fees, FLJJ is cheaper at 0.74% per year. On volatility, FLJJ has been the lower-risk option at 0.86%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 1-year period, JULZ has performed better with a 22.07% return vs 15.29%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

FLJJ is cheaper with a 0.74% expense ratio, compared with 0.79% for JULZ.

JULZ has the higher dividend yield at 11.00%, compared with 0.00% for FLJJ.

They also come from different issuers: TrueShares and Allianz. Their fees differ too: 0.79% for JULZ and 0.74% for FLJJ.

FLJJ currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (3.02 vs 2.16), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for JULZ and FLJJ

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer